Michael Buesch wrote:
> 
> But, why do we talk about this, actually? Do we actually know what went 
> wrong, yet?
> Larry, did you dump a cookie of a frame that would trigger the crash? What 
> does the
> ring memory allocation look like at the time the crash would trigger? Are 
> there holes
> in the ring memory? What does the crashing cookie point to? The end of the 
> ring (aprox)
> or somewhere completely different.
> printk printk printk printk... :)
> 

Now that I'm not crashing Linux when it happens, I know a little more
about what happens. My last test with 5.1 firmware ran nearly 7 hours
before it died. At that point, ifconfig reported 25,407,000 packets
received for a total of 1,944 MB, and 36,843,000 packets transmitted
for a total of 596 MB. Those numbers for the MB transferred are not
what I expected - the flood ping should TX and RX equal numbers of
small packets, and the tcpperf run should TX large packets and RX only
ACKs.

In my latest run, I froze the TX queue when the first error occurred.
When that happened, there were still 6 more entries in the TX queue.
The cookies were all in the same sequence: 0x204A, 0x204E, 0x2050,
0x2052, 0x2054, 0x2056, and 0x205A. What happened to 0x2058?

I'm pretty busy today with the "Super Bowl", but I'm going to start a
long run with 5.0 firmware. My last run showed that the failure can
take a long time and that my previous tests may have missed an error.

Larry

_______________________________________________
Bcm43xx-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/bcm43xx-dev

Reply via email to